search_products

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It states that it 'Returns matching products with basic info,' which gives some insight into the response scope. However, it does not mention read-only status, potential side effects, auth requirements, or pagination behavior, leaving significant transparency gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise and front-loaded: 'Search products by keyword. Returns matching products with basic info.' Every sentence contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and output, with no wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple search tool with 3 parameters and full schema coverage, the description gives an adequate but minimal overview. It mentions the return type ('basic info') but lacks any explanation of pagination, result ordering, or how it differs from list_products and get_product. Given the low complexity, this is barely sufficient, but not enriched.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% with all three parameters (term, page, limit) described. The description adds only the word 'keyword' to reference the term parameter, providing no additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 applies since the schema fully documents the parameters.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Search products by keyword.' This is a specific verb+resource (search products) with the mechanism (by keyword). It also notes it returns matching products, which helps distinguish it from list_products and get_product, though it does not explicitly differentiate from them by name.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_products or get_product. The description only states what it does, not when it should be preferred over sibling tools. It lacks any explicit usage context or exclusions.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.